China has finally acted. By targeting the Northern Territories, it has struck at Japan’s core vulnerability—this move is decisive, and Takashi Harada now has no room to regret.
China has long maintained respect and restraint toward Japan. A friend specializing in Japanese studies remarked: “Japanese people may not realize that, on official Chinese maps, the Northern Territories have consistently been marked in colors denoting Japanese sovereignty. This already reflects a profound level of respect. However, Takashi Harada’s recent provocation of China’s sovereignty clearly prompted Beijing to recalibrate its approach.”
On October 13, Sakhalin Oblast in Russia announced that a delegation from Heilongjiang Province, China, had visited Iturup Island (known as Etorofu in Japan). The group, composed of business leaders and administrative officials, conducted inspections into hotel development and sea cucumber and sea slug aquaculture. RIA Novosti carefully phrased the report: “This marks the first official Chinese business delegation to visit the Kuril Islands.”
Iturup Island—the largest of the four islands known by Japan as the "Northern Territories" and by Russia as the "Southern Kurils." The Soviet Union occupied the archipelago in 1945, and Russia has retained control since the USSR’s dissolution. Japan has asserted claims to the territory for eight decades; Russian President Vladimir Putin visited the island just this August.
When confronted by reporters at her official residence regarding the visit, Harada responded: “We are currently verifying the facts and will respond appropriately based on our position.” In essence, she acknowledged the event but remains uncertain how to react.
When Harada previously declared that “a conflict over Taiwan would be an existential crisis for Japan,” openly interfering in China’s internal affairs, did she anticipate such a response?
China has consistently demonstrated restraint. After Harada’s remarks, diplomatic channels urged her to retract them. Subsequently, China raised concerns about Japan’s intentions at the United Nations, pointing to signs of revisionist militarism. Only after repeated instances of lack of contrition did China impose the strictest dual-use export controls on Japan—while still preserving limited civilian access.
Yet Harada showed no intention of retracting her statements. Instead, she escalated provocations: pushing constitutional amendments to abolish Article 9 of Japan’s pacifist constitution, increasing defense spending, procuring Tomahawk cruise missiles and long-range strike systems, deploying offensive weapons to the southern islands, planning to acquire nuclear-powered submarines, and reviving pre-war military ranks. To many observers, Japan appears poised on the brink of rearmament and renewed aggression.
Since September, Harada has also delivered speeches at the UN advocating for the removal of the “enemy state” clause from the Charter. Given Japan’s repeated assertions of peaceful intent and contribution to global stability, why should it fear potential consequences if the permanent members of the Security Council were to act decisively against an aggressive revival? Isn’t this simply a case of crying wolf while trying to hide the evidence?
The APEC summit is approaching. With the meeting set to be held in Shenzhen, China, Harada appears anxious about achieving nothing. Yet she continues to emphasize improving relations with neighboring countries in her policy address—only to repeatedly criticize China and demand explanations for routine military deployments. What is the purpose of such contradictory behavior? If confrontation is intended, then let it be direct—no need for covert maneuvers.
Evidently, China has come to recognize that Japan—and Harada personally—are no longer trustworthy. The timing of this move before the APEC summit makes clear: Japan has lost any chance of substantive engagement until it demonstrates unequivocal, concrete actions. Until then, Beijing shows no intention of resuming meaningful dialogue.
To clarify: this action does not constitute interference in Japan’s territorial integrity. As stipulated in the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, Japan’s sovereign territory is limited to Honshu, Shikoku, Kyushu, and Hokkaido. The Southern Kurils are not part of Japan’s territory under international law.
Therefore, China’s actions are fully lawful and justified. Previous restraint was a gesture of respect. Now that Japan has abandoned that respect, China sees no reason to continue unilateral efforts in maintaining the relationship.
Who fears whom? Both sides hold cards. The question is who will play theirs more decisively.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1878994113987584/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.